Will the Apple Watch apps be any good?

The trouble is, no one really knows what makes a good Watch app yet. Apple can hand guidelines to developers, but even it doesn’t know for certain how people are going to want to use the watch. Developers almost have to code for it, though – waiting means losing ground, users, and publicity to other apps – so thousands are now taking a crack at it and hoping that they get it right.

Even of they aren’t any good yet, they will improve rapidly once the Apple Watch is in the hands of the millions of users who have pre-ordered them (and the many millions more buying them over the coming months). We’ll have to wait for the real applications to arrive later this year, when the native SDK arrives. The current ones are just small shells who have to beam virtually everything over from your iPhone, causing lots of performance issues across the board.

I do hope they get better looking though, because my god, the current crop is clunky, busy, and ugly. Those dark transparent backgrounds everywhere remind me of old Android widgets.

I do hope they get better looking though, because my god, the current crop is clunky, busy, and ugly.

This is a subjective opinion that can never be quantified one way or the other, so it’s almost pointless to even bring it up. It’s like with the iOS7 makeover; some people loved it, and some said it was the ugliest thing they’d ever seen. I myself don’t give a shit one way or the other about cosmetics, so I don’t have an opinion on the matter. I’ve just seen a lot of pointless debates over looks – people like what they like, and you will NEVER come up with a design that pleases everyone.

We are our own server in our digital world, and we can be informed of things using many methods more efficiently than with our eyes.

Just about every neuroscientist would disagree. Auditory and haptic feedback are really only useful for drawing our attention (eg alarms or pain responses). They are extremely inefficient ways of conveying information.

We are our own server in our digital world, and we can be informed of things using many methods more efficiently than with our eyes.

Just about every neuroscientist would disagree. Auditory and haptic feedback are really only useful for drawing our attention (eg alarms or pain responses). They are extremely inefficient ways of conveying information.

Get used to it. We’re going to see more of this sort of rubbish as Apple fans and iWatch purchasers attempt to convince you, and themselves, that the iWatch is some sort of revolutionary device that will transform your life, despite all evidence to the contrary.

We are our own server in our digital world, and we can be informed of things using many methods more efficiently than with our eyes.

Just about every neuroscientist would disagree. Auditory and haptic feedback are really only useful for drawing our attention (eg alarms or pain responses). They are extremely inefficient ways of conveying information. [/q]

Get used to it. We’re going to see more of this sort of rubbish as Apple fans and iWatch purchasers attempt to convince you, and themselves, that the iWatch is some sort of revolutionary device that will transform your life, despite all evidence to the contrary.

Rubbish? No it’s very simple.

Use case 1 of ?: Spouse texts wanting to know if I’m on my way home yet.

Old way:

My pocket vibrates and/or sounds. It could be a custom vibration or tone but it’s probably not. I pull phone from pocket, read the alert, unlock the screen, and reply. I can type a full message or maybe select from 1-3 already-typed strings. I send the message, lock phone, put back in pocket. 2 minutes later another text comes in. I pull from pocket, read text (is it “OK” or “buy dog food”?), reply if needed, lock phone again, put into my pocket. Driving home my phone is either out on the console or in my pocket. If it’s in my pocket I have to pull it out while driving. Plus texting & driving is straight up illegal in many places now.

Possible new way:

I feel a custom vibration on my wrist signifying a new message from my spouse. While working I glance at the watch to see the text and a simple touch replies a short, context-appropriate text {On my way, OK, Call me}. I continue packing up to leave and feel another short vibration on my wrist, this one signifying a message of “OK”, and I can dismiss it with a wrist flick forward or record a voice over text with 2 wrist flicks inward. When driving home my hands don’t have to leave the wheel no matter how many texts come in.

I feel a custom vibration on my wrist signifying a new message from my spouse. While working I glance at the watch to see the text and a simple touch replies a short, context-appropriate text {On my way, OK, Call me}. I continue packing up to leave and feel another short vibration on my wrist, this one signifying a message of “OK”, and I can dismiss it with a wrist flick forward or record a voice over text with 2 wrist flicks inward. When driving home my hands don’t have to leave the wheel no matter how many texts come in.

The absolutely critical word here is “glance”.

From all the reviews from people who had preview Watches the recurring theme is that the Watch is all about glances, very short snaps of information and communication. If you have minutes you use your phone, if you have hours you use your computer, but if you have seconds you use the Watch. Successful apps on the Watch will be ones that can deliver useful functionality in seconds.

That will require some careful work by developers. Just like best and most successful phone apps were not just miniature versions of desktop apps so Watch apps will not be miniature versions of phone apps. It will be very interesting to see which ones succeed and how they do so.

Every iteration of computing, every moment of true inflection when computing mutates in a major way, is met by the same mix of cynicism and dismissal by conservative techies (techies are far, far more conservative than general consumers) and by the same sense of confusion because what is being invented is a new dimension and grammar for human computer interaction.

Computing is now moving onto our bodies and becoming something we do in seconds.

I pull phone from pocket, read the alert, unlock the screen, and reply. I can type a full message or maybe select from 1-3 already-typed strings. I send the message, lock phone, put back in pocket. 2 minutes later another text comes in. I pull from pocket, read text (is it “OK” or “buy dog food”?), reply if needed, lock phone again, put into my pocket.

Possible new way:

You have set up your phone so that certain people can ask for your location with a special message. Your phone will put a message in the chat that your location has been given at that time to that person. You can just go on with what you were doing and look at the message when you have time.

Apple is a marketing company that sells consumer devices. They are not leaders in scientific research.

Researchers have been working on human-machine interfaces for the best part of 100 years. They have a very good idea of what works and what doesn’t.

The iWatch fails just about every guideline for the design and implementation of Human-Machine Interfaces.[eg auditory alarms should only be used as warnings, visual displays should be placed directly in the line of vision, only essential information should be provided on displays, controls should not need visual confirmation etc, etc.]

I can assure you that the iWatch and similar devices will prove to be a major problem rather than a solution.

Australian police have already stated that simply wearing (without even using) an iWatch while driving will be illegal due to the potential to distract.

I’d expect them to begin to look slicker as the devs get used to the platform and they get feedback from the users.

will they be any good?

IMHO, you are only qualfied to judge that if you actually own a watch. Your experience with them over time is the key. Just reading reviewers comments at launch is not a real indication of their long term usability. (Just like hacks who review a Linux Distro by the installation process. Is that a real review of the long term use of the software? IMHO, no it is not)